I think Grizz Archer on the PPI Phantom thread mentions they want PPI to be a high end brand. The PPI Power Class amplifiers are still going strong, some of cleanest sounding for the money, and this Phantom line seems like a nice product too.
Well, the Polk amp says 125 Watts out and the PPI says 190 Watts out. Technically they could still be identical, but it doesn't sound like they are.These new Class D Polk amplifiers and PPI Phantom amplifiers are more or less clones of each other. There are tons of information on the PPI Phantom amplifiers. Moreover, the pasmag.com reviews both, the 4-channel PPI and the Polk (near identical results). If I was interested in this amplifier, I'd buy the PPI version, PPIP600.2, because it's basically the same thing and costs less. I don't know if these amplifiers represent the ultimate in Class D SQ. My gut feeling is that this honor goes to Alpine PDX and JL Audio HD. But for the money, given that it's half the price of Alpine PDX-F4/F6, the PPI/Polk design seems good value. I just got myself a 4-channel version to drive subwoofer and rear speakers. (The 4-channel version is $30 off at soniceletronix right now)
It could be that they use the same board circuit layout but different quality components. Quite a bit of difference can come from that. However, I always take the manufacturer's ratings with a grain of salt because there is no way to confirm them without measurement equipment. The 4-channel versions are also rated so that PPI is a little better than Polk, but a pasmag.com review showed very close wattage output between them. It seems like Polk might have underrated its amplifier a little, while PPI did not bench a lot better than its spec sheet rating. In any case, choosing the PPI among these two seems like a no brainier to me given that it's cheaper right now.Well, the Polk amp says 125 Watts out and the PPI says 190 Watts out. Technically they could still be identical, but it doesn't sound like they are.